User talk:Kok Tat

November 2015

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. Osarius - Want a chat? 08:51, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. sandgemADDICT ^yeah? 09:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 2015 United Arab Emirates v Malaysia football match for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2015 United Arab Emirates v Malaysia football match is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 United Arab Emirates v Malaysia football match until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Qed237 (talk) 11:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jurgen Kantner

The article Jurgen Kantner has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. O Fortuna!^{...Imperatrix mundi.} 13:19, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Darrell Ward

The article Darrell Ward has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:BLP1E

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kok Tat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was blocked on 5 March 2017 without a warning given and I was accused of using my account abusively. Please, can I be unblocked as soon as possible and hope I won't use it abusively again.

Decline reason:

CheckUser Confirmed abuse of multiple accounts. —DoRD (talk) 12:18, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This is a checkuser block, based on technical evidence indicating you are also User:Wok Kanda and are using multiple accounts to evade scutiny of your edits. Because the evidence cannot be routinely reviewed except by other checkusers, you will need to appeal to the Arbitration Committee rather than via the unblock template. There's more info on this at this policy section. -- Euryalus (talk) 09:04, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually i'm not related to that User:Wok Kanda and have no connection with that account and can you please unblock me.Kok Tat (talk) 09:25, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kok Tat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I never abuse multiple accounts on Wikipedia even though I was accused of doing that and i'm not related to that User:Wok Kanda and have no connection with that account and my goal is to edit Wikipedia properly. My request is to unblock me as soon as possible.

Decline reason:

Two people with access to the technical information have confirmed you are indeed related to that other account. As such, I'm revoking your talk page access. You've been hold how to dispute these claims. Yamla (talk) 13:26, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Kok Tat (talk) 13:10, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hamilton–Rosberg rivalry for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hamilton–Rosberg rivalry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamilton–Rosberg rivalry until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jake Brockman (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]